It's been a long time since we've seen an American spacecraft floating down on three huge, red and white main parachutes to splashdown. By my count, the last time it happened was at the conclusion of the Apollo-Soyuz mission in 1975.
Every successful manned U.S. space flight since the shuttle entered service in 1981 has glided to a stop in the Mojave Desert or at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida.
The word "splashdown" reentered space lexicon earlier this month when commercial space upstart SpaceX (Hawthorne, Calif.) successfully completed a high-altitude "drop test" of its Dragon spacecraft that could someday be used to ferry astronauts to the International Space Station. View a video of the drop test here.
When those three main chutes deploy, crews will again know they have returned safely to Earth. (The main parachutes are huge. The engineer who designed the Apollo main chutes recalled that, once folded and stowed, the thin material was as dense as maple.)
The Dragon drop test was another success for SpaceX, the high-flying commercial space venture launched by PayPal founder Elon Musk. The aerospace company has plenty of critics, many who insist that SpaceX is little more than a collection rocket scientist wannabes experimenting with taxpayer funds while reporting to a boss known for over-promising and over-extending himself both technically and financially.
SpaceX has nevertheless achieved two major milestones in recent months, including the successful launch in June of its multistage Falcon 9 rocket and this month's drop test of the Dragon spacecraft. The next big hurdle will be launching a pressurized Dragon capsule into Earth orbit, then returning it in one piece.
SpaceX has fast become a lightning rod in the ongoing debate over the future direction of U.S. manned spaceflight. It has been lobbying hard for more commercial space funding in NASA's fiscal 2011 budget. The budget debate also has become the key public forum for determining the space agency's future direction. Critics say NASA is sacrificing crew safety in its push to bring on contractors like SpaceX and Orbital Sciences to take over tasks like ferrying astronauts and supplies to the space station once the shuttle program ends next year. (NASA will use Russian Soyuz spacecraft as a bridge to a new orbital transportation system.)
If SpaceX can continue achieving milestones, they and other commercial space ventures should be given every opportunity to compete for a piece of NASA's space budget -- as long as the space agency ensures that new commercial systems are safe and thoroughly tested. If SpaceX flunks a test, then they move to the back of line like every other competitor.
Another update: According to reports, SpaceX has requested Oct. 23 as the launch date for its second Falcon 9 rocket. The flight will seek to place SpaceX's Dragon cargo capsule into orbit. It is believed that the orbital flight test also will include splashdown and recovery. Stay tuned.
Elon Musk formed Space Exploration Technologies Corp. with the express purpose of entering the commercial space business. The only ways to survive in that market are to either secure satellite and other payload launch contracts from, say, a telecommunications company, or win development contracts from NASA. SpaceX has NASA's ear as the space agency attempts to fill the gap in access to low-Earth orbit with the retirement of the space shuttle next year. NASA's new focus is sending humans beyond Earth orbit. SpaceX is one of the few potential operators aside from Russia's Soyuz that can ferry astronauts to the International Space Station. We will find out fairly soon whether the Falcon 9 rocket and the Dragon spacecraft being tested by SpaceX are up to the task of safely lofting humans into orbit.
So if I understand what you are saying: SpaceX while a commercial endeavor is really a private company living off the contracts from NASA? Or does SpaceX make a living providing non-NASA products as well? It is interesting to see the structure and the business model for these type of high cost/risk developments. I agree that crew safety should be the highest concern. I am hopeful that the public / private model for space platform development works and look forward to future news of their success!
SpaceX is the primary contractor under NASA's Commercial Orbit Transportation Services project. Others could provide supply services to the International Space Station, but SpaceX is essentially the only U.S. player with the potential to carry astronauts to Earth orbit. Congress is still debating whether or if to salvage parts of the canceled Constellation moon rocket program, including the Orion spacecraft. NASA officials and policy makers are gradually shifting their focus to development of a heavy lift capability to send payloads beyond Earth orbit. Meanwhile, the debate over how to ensure crew safety continues.
Is SpaceX the only player right now for astronaut transport? I was wondering what, if any other competition there is? Does NASA have any other platforms in the works or is SpaceX using all the available funds? I would like to see the US (NASA or ?) continue to reach out into space both near in orbit and in exploration of other planets (esp. manned exploration). The challenges and technology advancements needed provide benefits to the entire tech community.
David Patterson, known for his pioneering research that led to RAID, clusters and more, is part of a team at UC Berkeley that recently made its RISC-V processor architecture an open source hardware offering. We talk with Patterson and one of his colleagues behind the effort about the opportunities they see, what new kinds of designs they hope to enable and what it means for today’s commercial processor giants such as Intel, ARM and Imagination Technologies.